The ethics of gun control.

What would you think if a prospective date confirmed the time, the place and the plans for the evening, then added: “Make sure that you come unarmed”? Would you go to the date anyway or wonder what he’s up to? I wonder much the same when politicians and gun control pushers declare over and over their ardent wish to see me and my compatriots disarmed. Gun control has one very unique feature that sets it apart from other forms of victimization. Any incremental success makes further oppression easier.

Gun control pushers already advocate using deadly force against tens of millions of people whose only crime is peacefully possessing something the rulers do not like. With the actions of a few criminals and psychopaths held up as their excuse, they propose victimizing tens of millions of people who are innocent of any wrongdoing. Like muggers and rapists, gun control pushers rationalize their actions by blaming the victims.

Back in 1938, Nazis fined Jews for the damage inflicted on Jewish businesses by Nazi pogroms. Today, mostly certain politicians want to victimize the American people who have been harmed already by violent criminals in government-enforced “gun-free” zones. Taking away personal arms and restricting future availability would make future mass shootings that much harder to counter. Worse, gun control would make more destructive government excesses harder to counter as well.

Gun control pushers have even less shame than typical rapists. A repulsed rapist doesn’t start whining: “OK, so I can’t rape you now, but how about just dropping your pants? I won’t penetrate you now, but you can’t refuse a reasonable compromise! How about just an inch, no more than two, honest.” Taking away defenses and property of innocent people is a molestation and should be treated as such.